MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2058261174 · doi:10.3899/jrheum.111234

The Ultrasound Imaging Module: A Report from the GRAPPA 2010 Annual Meeting

2012· article· en· W2058261174 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gurjit S. Kaeley, Catherine Bakewell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Rheumatology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEnthesitisPsoriatic arthritisPsoriasisSynovitisVascularitySubclinical infectionDermatologyUltrasoundEnthesisSpondyloarthropathyArthritisRadiologySurgeryInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a plenary session at the 2010 meeting of the Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA), the use of sonography for evaluating articular disease and enthesitis in psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis (PsA) was reviewed. Ultrasound can readily demonstrate signs of synovitis, erosions, and osteoproliferation. There is a need to develop ultrasound joint indices to evaluate and follow PsA longitudinally. Sonography is able to depict ultrastructural features of enthesitis, as well as increased vascularity. Sonographic signs of subclinical enthesitis in patients with psoriasis have been reported by 2 groups, 1 of which has reported limited longitudinal data that suggest baseline composite enthesitis scores may predict future risk of PsA. Although recent studies have studied mostly lower extremity entheses, further work is needed to clarify if other areas need to be included, especially within the framework of the synovial entheseal complex. The study design of the PREPARE (Prevalence of Psoriatic Arthritis in Adults with Psoriasis) trial was also presented.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.027

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.252 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations7
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Rheumatology→Same topicSpondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments→French-language works237,207→